HR: 10:20h
AN: S21G-01 [PDF]
TI: Dynamic Heterogeneities Versus Fixed Heterogeneities in Earthquake
Models
AU: * Shaw, B E
EM: shaw@ldeo.columbia.edu
AF: Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, Palisades, NY 10964 United States
AB:
A debate has raged over whether fixed material and geometrical
heterogeneities or alternatively dynamic stress heterogeneities
arising through frictional instabilities dominate earthquake complexity.
It may also be that both
types of heterogeneities interact and are important.
This work makes a first step in examining this interaction,
combining two previously separate lines of research.
One line examined friction which have attractors (the subset of phase
space the system evolves towards in the long run) on homogeneous faults
which are simple, and then added fixed heterogeneities to the faults to
obtain complex attractors. Another line examined frictions which
produced complex attractors on homogeneous faults.
Here, we examine frictions which produce complex attractors on homogeneous
faults, and study them on heterogeneous faults, in order to study the interaction
of dynamic stress heterogeneities and fixed fault heterogeneities.
We consider two types of fixed heterogeneities: an additive noise and a multiplicative
noise to the frictional strength of the fault.
Because of the linearity of the bulk elastodynamics, the
attractor is unaffected by
additive fixed noise in the strength of the fault:
adding an arbitrary function of space, fixed in time, to the
friction leaves the resulting attractor unchanged.
In contrast, multiplicative fixed noise multiplying the friction
can have a profound
effect on the resulting attractor.
In the small multiplicative noise amplitude limit, the frictional weakening attractor is
little perturbed;
at finite amplitudes,
fixed heterogeneities substantially alter the attractor.
We see, as one consequence, a shift toward longer length events at larger amplitudes.
Fixed heterogeneities are seen to reduce the irregularities created by the
frictional instability we study, but by no means destroy them.
We quantify this by examining a measure of variability of importance
to hazard, the coefficient of variation of large event recurrence times.
The coefficient of variation is seen to remain substantial even for large
fixed heterogeneities.
For friction which weakens with time, so the underlying uniform fault
attractor is simple, fixed heterogeneities
increase irregularity.
For all frictions examined,
at low fixed heterogeneity the stress concentrations left over by the ends of the
large
events dominate where most of the small events occur, while at higher
heterogeneity the stress irregularities left over by fixed fault heterogeneities
begin to dominate where the small events occur.
This may be the strongest signature of fixed heterogeneities,
and should be examined further in the Earth.
Finally, in what may have important implications for
more sophisticated estimates of earthquake hazard,
we see a correlation of locations with lower strength drop
having higher variation in large event repeat times.
DE: 3220 Nonlinear dynamics
DE: 7209 Earthquake dynamics and mechanics
DE: 7223 Seismic hazard assessment and prediction
DE: 7230 Seismicity and seismotectonics
DE: 7260 Theory and modeling
SC: Seismology [S]
MN: 2003 Fall Meeting